Recently, it was reported that Dustin McCaskill was arrested here in Las Vegas for making threats on Facebook. There is some room for arguments about whether the First Amendment applies in this case, but unlike some other recent cases, Dustin has made specific and persistent threats for well over a year.

One of the things mentioned in the article is that these threats were made on Dustin’s “Colorado Cop Block” Facebook page, which has apparently been removed by someone (possibly FB, but as far as I know, the person and exact reason is not known, at this time). There is a bit of context that needs to be added there. Because of violent threats of the same nature both against police and other citizens on Dustin’s previous CB page, “Southern Oklahoma Cop Block,” which was eventually removed by FB as a result of the threats, Cop Block publicly disassociated itself from Dustin and SOCB last year (almost exactly one year ago). Not only was a post made on the main page explaining the reasons for that action, but SOCB was removed from the directory of official CB pages and content generated by that page was no longer accepted for reposts, either on the site or the main Cop Block FB page.

Later, after Dustin moved to Colorado, he again tried to use Cop Block’s notoriety to gain attention for himself, by creating the “Colorado Cop Block” page. This was even after he had himself claimed he didn’t want to be associated with Cop Block and had only kept “Southern Oklahoma Cop Block” as the title of his page because he wasn’t allowed by Facebook to change it. He also had created several anti-Cop Block pages, including one named “Cop Block Exposed” (which actually predated the Cop Block Exposed page that got a bit of attention recently by “exposing” really easy to find information and pictures about some of the members of CB and prompted him to complain about his page being the “original” CBX page).

Some of Dustin’s less than wise advice to South Florida Cop Block on Facebook.

It didn’t take long before he was posting violent threats again and had actually escalated to the type of things that got him arrested. So, it also wasn’t long before another post publicly disassociating Cop Block from Dustin and his pages was posted. Instead of listening to that advice about avoiding aggressive behavior, Dustin ran around Facebook posting insults and threats to the admins (myself included) of any of the affiliate pages he could find that had shared that post and stating that admitting to the FBI that he made those threats, as well as the threats themselves, were “the way to get things done” or some variation of that.

We can have discussions about when and if people should defend themselves against aggression by the cops, which is something Cop Block has done in the past, as evidenced by the “controversial” (mostly among people that have never watched it) Larken Rose video “When Should You Shoot a Cop?,” which discusses that very issue. Also, as stated, there is some level of argument that can be made about the First Amendment protection of speech vs. actions. However, making public threats (that Dustin obviously wasn’t even capable of carrying out) isn’t actually the way to get anything done, but more realistically, just a good way to get yourself put in prison, where you can’t do shit but sit and stare at a wall, or maybe even get murdered yourself.

The transgressions of individuals reflect badly on a group at an inverse level dictated by the positive actions that a group takes to address those actions. When a group covers up for and enables an individual to continue negative behavior, the actions of those individuals rightfully reflects badly on the entire group. When a group does the right thing, then people understand that no group can keep every individual that has ever been involved with that group from doing something bad. “Bad Apples” have to be removed before they spoil the whole barrel, not used as an excuse that allows the rot to continue.

Cop Block can point to a legitimate and consistent history of holding our bad apples accountable for their adverse actions, while the police have a long and constant tradition of protecting theirs from any sort of repercussions for their actions, regardless of how bad or deadly they might be.

Kelly is a lifelong resident of Las Vegas, who’s been very active in local grassroots activism, as well as on a national level during his extensive travels. He’s also the founder/main contributor of Nevada Cop Block, served as editor/contributor at CopBlock.org and designed the Official Cop Block Press Passes. ____________________________________________________________________________ Connect with Kelly at these social networks; Facebook, YouTube and Twitter.

179 Comments

Did CB report this individual to the police? And what constitutes a threat to you? This is concerning to me. There are more idiots in America that can’t tell the difference between a wish or hope and an actual plan, than intelligent people who can see the difference. If cop block is calling the police, this whole project is now a fail.

There is absolutely no reason to threaten anyone. Unfortunately copblock does allow threats to continue. If you read Discus rules, copblock violates most of them. Why Discus hasn’t shut down copblock is beyond me. I’m sure someday they will get wise about it. These little damage control articles are too little too late.

All insulting aside, you have got to be fucking kidding. You post a bestiality video (deny all you want, everybody knows it was you), and you want to talk shit about what copblock does and does not allow. You make slanderous accusations about peoples supposed internet surfing habits, false accusations of people having criminal records, and you fake being a fucking probation officer in California. You hypocritical piece of shit.

You obviously have multiple mental melt downs. You are the only one talking about bestiality videos. You continue to make slanderous accusations about me and you have never proven anything. I do have your criminal record. Why don’t you quit lying to people. I’ve spoken to your town’s HR department about you. They know all about you which didn’t surprise me a bit. You are a liar and a con. What do you expect from a con like you. Oh yeah, you have a criminal record. Prove I’m not a parole officer in California. Again, you have never proven anything you say. People look at what you write and just laugh. You never showed up when we were supposed to meet. I wasted half a day waiting for you too show but I knew you were too much of a pussy to show. Why don’t you just shove that pea brain of your up your ass. You haven’t proven anything and your mouth runs none stop. You need help so get it.

Funny, in another post you claimed you were there for 2 hours. Now it’s half the day, huh? LOL. You don’t live in San Diego, and your not a probation or parole officer, and you certainly never showed up at that restaurant. And a parole officer is not the same thing as a probation officer, moron. Just like you calling a plaintiff a “plaintive”. And as far as a meltdown, slaps? LOLOL. You’re the one with the delusions. Like this criminal record you’re always talking about. You’re full of shit. You don’t even know my name or address, yet you somehow have this criminal record. And you did post that video, slaps. You’re just too much of a cowardly bitch to admit it. And it’s not me being laughed at, douche. Even t, the 2nd biggest liar and douche on this site, says he ignores your posts. So keep trying, assdropping. Like I’ve said before, your shit is funny. Such deep-grained ignorance usually is.

It’s the delusional monkey of copblock trying to lie again, Why don’t you just shut up and prove it? It would seem you are wasting countless hours saying the same thing over and over. You are the delusional one.

OK, slaps, I’ll trade you proof for proof. You claim you’ve seen this criminal record of mine, so post my name and address, you know, the College Park place your OCD drives you to claim I live in. That’s really ease to prove or disprove. In return, I’ll prove you’re not a probation or parole officer anywhere in the state of California. This way everybody here will know who the lying puke stain is. Of course, most already do..

I don’t negotiate with terrorists. I already asked you to prove your statements. This isn’t a show and tell game. I asked you to post your prove, you have refused for almost a year. Unless you prove your side, I will prove my side when I am good and ready. Remember, I found Ghost aka Graham Colson within a day. Your information was found within hours after you threatened me. You have a lot of growing up to do. By the way, what ever helps you sleep at night.

I care from a sociological perspective. It seems as if your little paperwork filings aren’t doing much to prevent the comments that you claim are threats. I’m wondering how long you’ll continue filing paperwork that nobody cares about. You certainly don’t need to answer if you’re embarrassed.

Disassociation from something is not the same as accountability. If you can show me the name of anyone associated with copblock listed as a witness against Dustin or any complaint made on behalf of copblock for terroristic threats to law enforcement then I would agree. Just ignoring someone doesn’t cut it. The link where your own supporters ripped off the “calendar” money also fails. Bitching about it in a blog is not accountability.

There’s no real accountability with CopBlock, it’s the reason it’s “decentralized.” It allows them to say, “it’s not CopBlock, it’s just that guy,” while never pulling he plug on a person’s ability to use and thereby drag down the name of CopBlock.

The calendar! Where’s all the money from that? Never returned? Who is being held accountable for that by CopBlock?

It most certainly is decentralized for accountability avoidance. This is displayed in the actions of CopBlock. Even the most recent “denunciation” or “distancing” of themselves from McCaskill demonstrate that. Repetitively hiding behind such phrases as “initiatory violence.” Which is a purposeful attempt to distract, since this site is on record that Police have already initiated violence through their existence by “subsisting on theft.”

In an actions vs words arena, actions always win, and the actions don’t support the words CopBlock hides behind.

So, it can only be that they planned the decentralization from the get go only to avoid accountablity? You know that for certain because of all the signs you see? Most of which are very much expressions of the voluntaryist or anarchist ideology. Try reading their literature first and then interpret their actions.

Did I say ONLY for avoiding accountability? No, I didn’t, but it was clearly a major aspect of the decision for decentralization, Eyre’s own words defending decentralization, combined with the overall actions of the CopBlock “organization” donstrate that.

I HAVE read their literature, I have read and watched their interviews, and I have judged their actions against their words.

LOL. “It most certainly is decentralized for accountability avoidance.” No, you didn’t say only. However your statement doesn’t really leave a lot of room for other causes. But go ahead, backpedal. It’s what you anti-CBers are known for.

My bad. I forgot. PETE pointed out that it’s all a government conspiracy trying to make CBers appear violent. Saying that they lack any accountabilty is just more of that same conspiracy to discredit the great CB.

No, you wrote this “There’s no real accountability with CopBlock, it’s the reason it’s “decentralized.” And then this “It most certainly is decentralized for accountability avoidance.” There was no need for you to say only. Had you even given a single hint that it may have been for other reasons too…but, no, you didn’t until this last comment, where it goes from “the reason” to the lessor “major reason”.

The ideology is based on decentralization. Any organization based on the ideology would be decentralized.

Common I filed a complaint with the Colorado State Police along with Facebook and a few words to Cop Block of which I never heard back. I am happy to hear the fucker is locked up. It would be nice to get rid of the pedophile and fake JC.

I’m still in the dark as to why but I was blocked from posting comments on CopBlocks FB page. I’ve never posted what could be considered a threat of any kind or anything to harsh but? None the less I’m blocked. I’m so bummed haha

Indeed. McCaskill is the sum of CopBlock ideology as well. Initiatory violence is bad, and CopBlock denounces it. However, CopBlock also preaches the idea that police, by their existence, have already initiated violence, in the form of theft. Further, CopBlock teaches that only the victim can determine sufficient penalty. These three pieces, when put together means that violence against police is never initiatory, but retaliatory, and any level of said violence is acceptable.

You’ve obviously never had any form of resistance training (that tells me a lot about you) and don’t know anything about torture. Holding out for three days is amazing. Your poster actually makes him look good in that respect. Idiot.

The “theft” is the aggression, yes, thereby rendering those who “subsist” on that theft, guilty of aggression for existing in a role that “subsists on theft.”

What you attempt to dance around is that CopBlock preaches that cops are extortionists, hence the “subsist on theft” catchphrase, and that by being extortionists are guilty of initiatory aggression by becoming a police employee.

Why the sudden shift? What does my opinion on that guy have a to do with the CopBlock shell game of “it doesn’t fit our philosophy” despite fitting CopBlock’s philosophy?

It’s probably for the same reason that no matter how I ask, nor how many times I have asked, you still have yet to answer one simple question: what facts do you have to support the religious belief that an individual has “rights”?

I guess to me I take the aggression to be like the ticketing and the similar seizure/theft like taking cash or carjacking as well as the kidnappings and similar assaultive behavior police perpetrate every day rather than just getting the paycheck. I would think it could theoretically be possible for a sheriff or police to not engage in aggression the only problem would be by doing so they would be fired almost immediately.

Basically he says that there can really be no “greatest good” since no people will completely agree what is the greatest good. I would say that he is probably right that violence and killing is the cognizable “greatest evil” but that implies that peace and prosperity then are the greatest good so there is a cognizable greatest good. He then goes from identifying a greatest evil to then concluding that since violence and killing are the greatest evil and operating from the premise that only a government can be powerful enough to stop foreign invasion and crime(violence/ killing) that we should therefore believe in a Leviathan Deity, a non-corporal abstract higher power called “State” or “Commonwealth” or “Civitas”(What we might today think of as municipal corporations), the non-corporeal abstract “entity” he calls the Leviathan, the corporate person or legal person of the state, the higher power of government religion.

I agree that the “greatest evil” a society can face is violence and killing(war/violent crime). The greatest good is therefore prosperity and peace. Prosperity is achieved by industry. Just like it is a natural human behavior to breathe it is also natural to engage in industry and accumulate stuff(property/posessions). The same as it would be aggression to stop someone else from breathing it would be aggression to interfere with their property/possessions. I’m sure you would agree if someone slashed your tires or stole your car you would consider it aggression/”wrong”(if we presume industry and peace are “right”/good). So rights would be derived from that. Violence/Killing= Bad. Peace/Prosperity=Good If you accept those premises then you can then derive “rights” and “wrongs” logically.

I think we can figure that if humans are social creatures then it is because society offers greater chance for survival and that since poverty and violence threaten survival and prosperity and peace enhance survival then those should be the goal orientated axioms for pro-social “rights” as opposed to anti-social “wrongs”. Social relating to voluntary cooperation through voluntary interaction/cooperation and non-interference as opposed to anti-social coercive interactions/aggression and I think the NAP is sort of the corollary. So I wouldn’t call the concept of rights in this context a faith-based “religious” dogma, I think there is a quantifiable “natural law” based on the above premises. I don’t think volunaryists look at Spooner and Von Mises as religious “saints” where they just believe in their ideas because they are exalted religious figures or that their books are sacred scriptures but because the ideas actually make logical sense in themselves. Compared to the religion of the constitution and the messiahs of Washington and Lincoln where the constitution is just this sacred dogma where no one can really explain why we have to follow it except the exalted saints, the founding fathers who art in heaven said so.

Nothing but supposition, and it doesn’t even answer the question. What facts support this religious belief in individual “rights”? And to be clear I’m talking about this religious belief in such “rights” as life and liberty. You went on and on about societal “rights” or what’s good from a societal perspective, but there was a distinct lack of fact.